All throughout the baseball offseason, rumors circulate regarding potentially new stomping grounds for several players. Some of these players help rumors come to fruition while others stay put amidst the speculation. The most recent player seemingly linked to a new team each and every is Garrett Atkins of the Colorado Rockies. Atkins, 29, has been their everyday third baseman for the last four seasons and would serve as an upgrade for several teams. The extent to which he would upgrade a new team may surprise, however.

In 2006, Garrett had an incredible season with the stick, hitting .329/.409/.556 with 29 home runs. His .410 wOBA led to +47 batting runs. Even with his -7 runs defense, after adjustments for value above replacement level and playing third base, Atkins was a +6 WAR player. +6 wins! In that same season, Matt Holliday posted a .973 OPS with 34 home runs, and was a +5.3 win player. Unfortunately, Atkins would not even come close to repeating that production the next season.

In 2007, Atkins hit .301/.367/.486, with 25 home runs and a .368 wOBA. The dropoff in his numbers led to his offense being worth +21 runs. Defensively, he stunk the field up, costing the team -20 runs at the hot corner. All told, Atkins went from +6 wins to +2 wins, essentially the equivalent of a league average player. The 2008 season did not get any better.

This past season, Atkins’ numbers declined even more, as he hit .286/.328/.452, with 21 home runs and a .337 wOBA. Atkins saw his wOBA drop 42 points from ’06 to ’07, and another 31 points from ’07 to ’08. His offense was worth just +5 runs. Garrett’s defense “improved” to his 2006 form, costing his team just -7 runs as opposed to the atrocious figure in 2007. Put together, his 2008 campaign was worth about +1.8 wins, slightly below average.

Marcel forecasts Atkins as a .357 wOBA hitter next season, which would signal an improvement of 20 points from this past season. This would result in +13 runs offensively. If we consider his defense to be about -9 runs, then Atkins would be a +2.4 win player next season. There are several teams on which a +2.4 win player would serve as an upgrade, but it is not as if these teams are acquiring a top-notch power hitter. His 2007 and 2008 seasons have shown that this is more likely his true talent level.

A few concrete reasons exist for his offensive decline: O-Swing%, Contact Rate, BB%, and K%. Atkins’ O-Swing, which measures the frequency of pitches out of the zone at which he swung, has risen from 14.1% in 2005 to 19.1% in 2008. Adversely, his overall rate of contact has decreased from 88.5% in 2005 to 85.7% in 2008. And, over the last three seasons, in which he played a minimum of 155 games, his raw walks have decreased from 79 to 40 while raw strikeouts have increased from 76 to 100.

Atkins might be a nice fit for a non-Colorado team, given his projected above average worth as well as his being under control for a bit longer, but he is not the same player he was in 2006… at all.

When Jayson Stark broke the story that the Phillies and Raul Ibanez were in hot pursuit of each other, I immediately e-mailed him to see if this was a half-hearted rumor or something serious. Of course, his reply implied that Ibanez to the Phillies was much more of a reality than a rumor. And, as many of us saw today, Ibanez officially inked a 3-yr/$30 mil deal to become the everyday left-fielder of the defending World Series champions. Signing Ibanez officially ends the Pat Burrell chapter in Phillies lore.

I presented Stark with my opinions on the deal, with which he agreed, and then asked him why their front office truly felt Ibanez would be the best bet. His answer, at which we both had a hearty web-chuckle, was that Ruben Amaro, Jr, wants to get better defensively at the position. For those unaware, Pat Burrell has been one of the worst left-fielders in baseball over the last three years.

UZR data has him costing the team -38.2 runs on defense from 2006-2008, the third lowest total for any left-fielder. Manny Ramirez is worst, at -42.6. Guess who comes in second place, slightly worse than Burrell and just a smidgeon better than Ramirez? That’s right, folks: Raul Ibanez.

The Phillies just replaced the third worst left-fielder over the last three seasons with the second worst. That could potentially be okay, though, if Ibanez could at least equal Burrell’s offensive productivity. I mean, they won with Burrell, and if Raul could provide similar offense, he would likely be had for a lesser fee, right? Well, let’s see. Ibanez signed for 3 yrs/$30 mil, an average annual value of $10 mil. Burrell, at most, would have cost the team $16 mil in arbitration for this year, or something like 3-yrs/$45 mil.

Therefore, if Ibanez could equal Burrell’s offense, and equal his putrid defense, then the Phillies would get the same player for $5 mil less. Unfortunately, the offense of Ibanez is not going to be equal to Burrell’s. Burrell is projected to be about +19 runs on offense. Marcel doesn’t like Ibanez, putting him at just +6 runs on offense, but I would tend to think that +11 is a more appropriate figure.

Therefore, we are talking about two players equally bad on defense who would get the same adjustments for position and value above replacement, not average, and one who is almost one full win less valuable on offense. Well, there goes that theory. Ibanez is projected to be worth 1 WAR next season, Burrell at 1.7. Neither is an elite player and both will be overpaid relative to their actual contribution, but if the goal truly involved improving defensively, then this is an absolutely horrendous move. I mean, if the goal is to improve defensively, then going out and signing one of the only two players worse than your lame duck left-fielder really does not help you reach that goal.

Add in that Ibanez is five years older than Burrell and this just makes no sense. Assuming Raul loses 0.25 wins each year, he would be a 0.5 WAR player by the time this contract ends, commanding something like $3-4 mil at fair market value and earning over double that figure. If Burrell were to lose the same 0.25 wins, he would go from 1.70 to 1.45 to 1.20, a total of 4.35 compred to Raul’s 2.25.

The other issue many in the Phillies blogosphere bring up is the fact that Ibanez is a Type A free agent, meaning the Mariners will receive the team’s first round draft pick this year. And even another issue is that he is a left-handed hitter, meaning that the only realistic right-handed threat is Jayson Werth.

Something important to keep in mind here is that there is a big difference between disliking a deal and disliking a player. As a devout Phillies fan, it isn’t as if I’m going to turn the television off whenever Raul bats, or constantly rail on his abilities. I’m going to root for him and hope he pulls through. I like him as a player and a person, but I dislike the move Amaro made in bringing him here, especially if the goal is to improve defense at the position. I think we are well past the stage when statistical analysis is not implemented in each and every front office, and I just cannot fathom the idea that nobody in the Phillies FO understood that Raul cannot field. Or, that they did know, publicly stated the goal of improving defensively, and STILL went out and signed him.

And before I wrap this up, let me just say that I HATE when people try to justify moves by saying a player is “a good clubhouse guy.” Who cares? To me, this is the hitting equivalent of calling a pitcher an “innings eater.” These are inane characteristics that are only used to describe players whose production does not speak for itself. I don’t care if Raul Ibanez can console Eric Bruntlett after a bad game, if he loves to discuss Jim Varney movies with Jamie Moyer, or can teach Geoff Jenkins and Matt Stairs the intricacies of Stratego. I care about wins, and as a fan and analyst, this move is not going to add wins to the team relative to the other alternatives.

If Amaro wanted to add a solid bat to man left-field not named Pat Burrell, why not sign Adam Dunn? In that case, he wouldn’t lose a draft pick and Dunn likely isn’t going to cost that much more than Ibanez. And even if he did, he’s 29 years old! All told, they got a nice player, but one that will serve as a downgrade from the alternatives. I hope this isn’t the sign of things to come in the Amaro era. Regardless, Phillies fans like myself will root on Ibanez in every way possible, but this deal is unequivocally poor.

For the last month or so, we have primarily been focusing on dollar valuations and factors outside of offense that need to be added into any type of evaluation. This has enabled us to determine the fair market values for several players as well as figure the fee certain teams are paying for each added win. One player left out of such posts is Manny Ramirez. Per reader request, we will figure out exactly what Manny’s fair market value is, taking into account his offense, defense, and baserunning.

Offense
One of the best hitters of all time, Manny is still one of the best hitters today, even at 36 years old. In 2008, he hit .332/.430/.601, good for a .432 wOBA and +56 runs above average, his best offensive season since 2002. In fact, via WPA/LI, 2008 was the best offensive season of Manny’s entire career! Moving forward, Marcel projects Manny to produce a .389 wOBA in 2009, which would translate to +30 runs above average. Not as potent as last year by any stretch, but still more effective offensively than the likes of Adam Dunn, Pat Burrell, Bobby Abreu, and the recently-signed Raul Ibanez.

Defense
Defensive excellence and Manny Ramirez, quite simply, do not belong in the same sentence. Unless, of course, the sentence is sarcastic and designed to point out how much of a liability he can be with the glove. UZR has him all over the place since 2002, ranging from +4 runs back then to -23 runs in 2005. From 2005-2008, his UZR numbers are -23, -20, -18, -5. His defense looked substantially better in 2008, but that does not make him solid in the field. A convervative UZR projection would peg Manny as a -10 runs fielder in 2009.

Baserunning/Adjustments
Via BP’s equivalent baserunning runs, Manny was worth +0.25 runs on the bases last year, and -2.05 runs the year before. Then, for whatever reason, the data does not seem to be there. Let’s call him -1 run on the bases, not terrible, not impressive.

As a corner outfielder, Manny should be docked -7.5 runs per 162 games. Projected to play 150 games next season, Manny’s prorated adjustment would be -6.9 runs. To determine value above replacement, and not average, the +20 runs per 700 PA also needs to be added. Prorating that, based on 584 projected plate appearances, adjusts this to +16.5 runs.

Overall
Adding the rounded results together: +30 + 17 – 10 – 7 – 1 = +29. Manny is a +2.9 win player in 2009. Assuming a going rate of $5 mil/win, Manny’s fair market value right now is $14.5 mil. A 3-yr deal, in a vacuum, would be worth closer to $42 mil. Suffice it to say, he is going to make much more than this. It is too difficult to quantify the merchandise and ticket sales that he will add to a team, but even with that, he does not seem to be worth the $22.5 mil/yr the Dodgers offered him earlier. Then again, accounting for the value of the actual marginal wins he is adding, he could very well be worth that fee.

Then again, perhaps the team feels that his -5 defense in 2008 is more a sign of things to come than the putrid numbers posted from 2005-07. If that is the case, then they are valuing Manny as a +34 run player, or +3.4 wins. That fair market value would be $17 mil/yr, and with the ticket sales and merchandise that would follow, it does seem more realistic that he could be worth about $22 mil/yr. For him to truly command a deal that impressive, he would have to be worth closer to four wins offensively than three, show that his defensive shortcomings are closer to a half-win docked rather than two full wins, and really keep a fanbase entertained.

Assuming -10 runs defensively, for Manny to truly command $22.5 mil/yr, he would need to be +45 runs on offense/baserunning combined. 45 runs offense + 17 over replacement – 10 defense – 7 position = +45. +45 runs = +4.5 wins. +4.5 wins * $5 mil/win = $22.5 mil.

Amidst all of the excitement surrounding the Paulino-Jaramillo deal, the Waechter/Farnsworth/Horacio signings, and the impending fate of Ramon Vazquez, many of us missed the interesting scenario presented by one Roy Oswalt. The 31-year old ace of the Drayton Gang has expressed interest in restructuring his contract. Roy wants to win and feels that his salary may hinder GM Ed Wade from signing someone like Ben Sheets.

Oswalt is due to earn $14 mil in 2009, $15 mil in 2010, and $16 mil in 2011. All three of those seasons are guaranteed under the 5-yr/$73 mil contract extension he signed during the 2006 season. The deal also includes a club option for 2012 worth $16 mil, that Oswalt can opt out of for a buyout lower than the $2 mil designated by the team. The exact details of his proposal are not known, but Richard Justice is speculating that it may involve Oswalt decreasing his 2009 salary to something like $6 mil in exchange for a couple more years added to the current deal.

Restructuring contracts is very tricky, because the Players Union is not very likely to allow a player to receive less than he signed for. However, this sort of restructuring is not entirely taboo. In fact, one instance of such a move occurred in 2006 with Tom Glavine and the New York Mets. Glavine had signed a 4-yr/$42.5 mil deal to pitch in New York from 2003-2006. He was set to earn $10.5 mil in 2006, but restructured the deal to pay him $7.5 mil. Added onto the contract were options, both club and player, for the 2007 season.

Initially, Glavine’s $10.5 mil included half of the money deferred at 6% interest. Upon restructuring the deal to $7.5 mil, the deferred total fell to $2.5 mil, meaning that, no matter what, he would earn $5.25 mil and then the rest of that year’s salary deferred at 6% interest. The player option for 2007 would earn him $5.5 mil with an increase of $1 mil each for logging 180, 190, and 200 innings. The club option was worth $12 mil. In either case, if his salary fell below $14 mil, he could earn that amount through bonuses and incentives.

In essence, Glavine restructured his deal to pay him a lower fee in 2006, yet guarantee himself security for the 2007 season.

Oswalt is likely looking to do something similar, in terms of trading current money for a bit of extra security in the future. Perhaps he will not look to reduce his 2009 salary by $8-9 mil, but I can definitely see him renegotiating to earn something like $8 mil in 2009 in exchange for the 2012 season becoming guaranteed and the option shifting to 2013.

Oswalt had a “down year” in 2008, but Marcel projects him at a 3.70 FIP in 185 IP. Translated to runs and wins, as well as a slight bonus for pitching that amount of innings, Oswalt’s true talent level calls him a +3.7 win pitcher next season. Were he to sign a 1-yr deal at fair market value, the deal would be close to $18 mil. He is already signed to a deal that “underpays” him, and now he is looking to earn even less than that so the team has a better shot at competing next season.

Who knows if anything will come of this, as Ed Wade has not publicly discussed the situation, but it sure would be interesting if the team could afford Ben Sheets due to Oswalt restructuring. He could not accept a paycut, as the union prohibits such practices. His decreased salary in 2009 would have to be made up for in the form of more money and/or years down the road.

Drayton does not want to go over $100 mil on his payroll, and his supposed unwillingness to be flexible bugs me. The team was not that good in 2008, vastly outperformed their talent level, and realistically has little chance at contending in 2009. Signing someone like Sheets will not guarantee them the division or wild card, but at the very least shows someone like Oswalt that the team is serious about winning. Regardless, I find it quite odd that McLane wouldn’t be willing to up the payroll by whatever it takes to sign Sheets, or someone along those lines.

Earlier today, we took a look at the potential super-rotation the New York Yankees may feature next year. They already signed CC Sabathia to a monster deal and are considered the front-runners for both A.J. Burnett and Derek Lowe. With Mike Mussina retiring, and Andy Pettitte’s uncertainty, the aforementioned three would join forces with Chien-Ming Wang and Joba Chamberlain to improve the rotation by approximately six full wins above replacement.

Brian Cashman left the Winter Meetings today to fly to Texas, in order to make a final offer to Andy Pettitte. The one-year offer is believed to be worth $10 mil, a paycut from Pettitte’s $16 mil salary in 2008. While Andy has not discussed wanting more than his fee last season, he has made it clear that he does not want to take a paycut. Cashman said that the offer for Pettitte would be to claim the final spot in the starting rotation. Assuming that the decision here is between Lowe and Pettitte, let’s weigh the pros and cons.

First off, what are their true talent level projections for 2009? Marcel forecasts Lowe to produce a 3.67 FIP in 185 IP. I would bump that up to around 3.80 given that he is going from the NL to the AL, so we can call him a 3.80 FIP pitcher in 185 IP. Compared to the replacement level, with a slight reward for pitching all those innings himself, and not allowing a poor reliever to enter, those numbers translate to +35 runs, +3.5 WAR.

Pettitte is projected to log 182 innings, with a 3.98 FIP. To make the comparison a bit easier, let’s bump him up to 185 IP, the same figure as Lowe, with a 4.00 FIP. Factoring in the same replacement level and slight reward, Pettitte in 2009 comes out to +31 runs, +3.1 WAR.

Therefore, Lowe is worth a bit under a half-win better than Pettitte based on their true talent levels. The fair market value for each, assuming $4.8 mil/win, would be $16.8 mil for Lowe and $14.9 mil for Pettitte. Replacing Lowe with Pettitte in the super-rotation will cost them 0.4 wins, meaning they would be worth +19.4 wins as opposed to +13.8 in 2008. This is still a substantial improvement, meaning the differences between Pettitte and Lowe are not that significant.

In terms of salary, however, it isn’t likely that either will earn their fair market value. As I mentioned earlier, Pettitte is being offered a take-it-or-leave-it, 1-yr/$10 mil deal. With a 10% discount rate factored in for the security of a long-term deal, Lowe would sign for 3-yrs/45 mil, or 4-yrs/60 mil. Therefore, that extra half-win of Lowe’s value would cost around $5 mil.

As commenter Steve Sanders pointed out, though, signing Pettitte instead of Lowe would give Cashman greater flexibility in the future. Pettitte would sign for a 1-yr deal, be an above average pitcher less than a half of a win worse than Lowe, and after this season, come off the books, freeing up more money to be spent elsewhere. In the past, Cashman would sign a plethora of players to multi-year deals, hamstringing himself in the process.

With Lowe, if we assume a dropoff of 0.35 wins per year, over the course of a 3-yr deal, he would go from 3.50 to 3.15 in 2010, to 2.80 in 2011. Perhaps the contention of those fans in favor of bringing back Pettitte for the 1-yr deal as opposed to signing Lowe is that they will get similar value in 2009, and be able to avoid paying $15 mil to a 2.80 win player in 2011, when some of their prospects may be ready for full-time rotation duty.

What say you, Yanks fans? Do you want Pettitte back for one year, or Lowe for a few years?

One of the big decisions for first-year GM Ruben Amaro, Jr, is whether or not he will retain Pat Burrell. Burrell is a three true outcomes hitter who plays poor defense at a corner outfield position. There are plenty of those on the market this season, driving down the price. In many other off-seasons, players like Burrell and Adam Dunn would likely command $14 mil or so, while now it appears more likely that they will earn something in the $10-11 mil range. Regardless of the exactitudes, Burrell’s love for the city and the market surplus of like-players means he could be had for a lesser fee.

His defense stinks, though, and he would be better-suited to serve as a DH for an AL team. Though Burrell has been one of my favorite players for years, if he were to sign elsewhere and the Phillies could replace him, perhaps with a slightly less productive hitter but more solid defender, this Phightins phan would not be particularly upset. I would, however, be upset if Amaro let Burrell go elsewhere and signed one of the other good-hitting, no-defense corner outfielders to replace him.

According to Jayson Stark, this may come to fruition, as the defending champs and Raul Ibanez seemingly have strong mutual interest. As Peter Griffin would say, this really grinds my gears!

Before even looking at the numbers, let it be known that Burrell is 32 and Ibanez is 37. Players like these two do not age particularly well, and yet the Phillies seem more willing to give a multi-year deal to someone five years older than their “current” left-fielder. I’m sure Ibanez is a standup guy and a positive influence in the clubhouse, but it isn’t as if Burrell is Sidney Ponson/Milton Bradley attitude-wise. For this to even make sense, Ibanez would have to project much better offensively, and at least a little better defensively.

Burrell’s 2009 Marcel wOBA is .369 to the .344 of Ibanez. This translates to +19 runs offensively for Burrell and just +6 for Ibanez. Both are likely to play the whole season, so we dock 7.5 runs for an adjustment. Meanwhile, Burrell would get +17 runs to adjust to value above replacement while Ibanez would get +18 runs. Now, we move onto defense. Both of these guys have been either the worst, or among the worst, defensive left-fielders over the past two seasons.

A rough UZR projection has them both at around -12 or -13 runs defensively for 2009. If we consider them both to be -12, then Burrell is, all told, +16.5 runs above replacement. Ibanez… is +5.5 runs. Translated to wins, we’re talking about +1.65 wins vs. +0.55 wins.

I have nothing against Ruben Amaro, Jr. Heck, I played baseball with his nephew and his brother even donated bases and balls to a league my father and I used to run. He will have to forgive me, though, for failing to understand why he would pursue a player worth over a full win less and who is five years older than a player he could likely easily re-sign. If you do not want Burrell back, fine, but do not replace him with someone less productive than he and much older in baseball terms.

Even if this deal were just for one season, I still would not like it, because it isn’t as if the Phillies have a top-tiered prospect waiting in the wings to take over the position. If you do not plan on re-signing Burrell, it makes no sense to sign someone with similar skills that is less productive, older, and almost as, if not equally, costly.

Yesterday, the New York Yankees signed CC Sabathia to a 7-yr deal worth approximately $161 mil. With a +5.5 win projection for 2009, and the more realistic $4.8 mil/win given the current economy, Sabathia’s fair market value would have been around $26 mil. Factor in a 10% discount rate for a long-term deal and a 7-yr contract comes out to $164 mil, extremely close to the actual terms of the signing. Brian Cashman mentioned how serious he felt about pitching and getting Sabathia definitely cemented that feeling in the minds of Yankees fans.

The signing of Sabathia piqued the interest of Derek Lowe, whose interest in pitching in New York grew following the move. On top of that, the Yankees reportedly have a 5-yr offer on the table for A.J. Burnett worth about $85 mil. Yes, the Yankees are apparently the front-runners for three of arguably the top four free agents in this class. If I see a report placing them atop the list off potential suitors for Mark Teixeira, my head just might explode.

A couple of weeks ago, I discussed what a potential new look Atlanta Braves rotation would produce, given their acquisition of Javier Vazquez and supposed guaranteed fifth-year for Burnett. Let’s do the same for the Yankees. For the sake of this post, we are going to assume all of the following:

1) Cashman signs Lowe and Burnett
2) Wang is fully recoverd and makes 30+ starts
3) Chamberlain pitches at least 140-150 IP in 25+ GS
4) Andy Pettitte does not return

The Yankees rotation in 2009 would then consist of: CC Sabathia, Derek Lowe, A.J. Burnett, Joba Chamberlain, and Chien-Ming Wang. Can anyone say super-rotation even before looking at the numbers?

Sabathia, Lowe, and Burnett have been discussed here before in dollar valuation articles. CC is a +5.5 win pitcher in 2009. With a 3.80 FIP in 187 innings, and a few more runs added for logging innings, Burnett would be +3.5. Lowe is projected to post a 3.67 FIP in 185 IP, but the switching of leagues from the Dodgers to the Yankees should bump that up a bit. If we call him a 3.80 FIP pitcher in 185 IP, he is virtually the same as Burnett, +3.5 wins.

Wang previously established himself capable of a heavy workload, and, if healthy in 2009, I see no reason why he couldn’t meet his Bill James projection of 200 IP at a 3.90 FIP. This makes Wang, with a few more runs for amassing 200 innings, a +3.5 win pitcher. And if Joba can manage a 3.30 FIP in 145 IP, he would also be a +3.5 win pitcher. For those keeping score at home, that gives the Yankees a +5.5 win pitcher and four +3.5 win pitchers in their potential super-rotation.

Put together, that is +19.5 wins. How does that compare to the 2008 rotation?

Well, due to injuries and such, the 2008 rotation was piecework at best. Outside of full contributions from Pettitte and Mussina, the Yankees got 12 starts from Joba and 15 from Wang. They received 105 Rasner-innings, 34 from Hughes, and 36 from Kennedy. Ponson managed to pitch 79 innings as well.

Mussina was top dog in 2008, at +4.7 wins. Pettitte came in second at +3.9 wins. Wang and Chamberlain, albeit in limited starting duty, were worth +1.9 wins each. Rasner was a +0.9 win pitcher and Hughes came in at +0.5. Ponson and Kennedy were the definition of replacement level. All told, this 2008 starting staff combined for +13.8 wins.

If we round 2009 up to +20 wins and 2008 up to +14 wins, then putting together this potential rotation would add six whole wins to their 2008 total, in the rotation alone. We aren’t even talking about defensive upgrades or other moves for the offense. You might think that six wins doesn’t seem like all that much given the quality of Sabathia, Burnett, and Lowe; however, if all other things remained constant, those six wins would have given the Yankees 95 wins in 2008, not 89. They are still making moves elsewhere to strengthen other facets of the club, but if Cashman can pull this off, the 2009 Yankees will be very, very good.

For the last few weeks, the Phillies and newly appointed GM Ruben Amaro, Jr, have been linked to numerous different players and scenarios. They were apparently considered a frontrunner for Derek Lowe before a new report revealed they haven’t even put together a formal offer. The defending champs were also reportedly involved in a proposed three-team trade that would finally end the Jake Peavy trade saga. With Chase Utley out for, most likely, at least one month, they have also been linked to players like Nick Punto and the recently-signed Mark Loretta. On top of that, they have to decide whether or not to bring back Pat Burrell and/or Jamie Moyer.

With all of these rumors and internal decisions, it is somewhat surprising that, prior to tonight, their lone move involved shipping Greg Golson—another Michael Bourn-type—for John Mayberry, Jr of the Rangers. This was a swapping of speed for power, as Mayberry is said to have 30-HR potential. Tonight, however, they sent AAA backstop Jason Jaramillo to the Pirates for their backup catcher, Ronnie Paulino.

In 2006 and 2007, Paulino was the starting catcher for the Pirates, before losing his job to Ryan Doumit this past season. During those two seasons, Paulino averaged 131 games, posted a .319 wOBA, and produced an average of -5 runs below average. In just 40 games in 2008, his wOBA fell to just .260, and he was worth -7 runs below average offensively in a mere 130 plate appearances.

In the minor leagues, Jaramillo has put up numbers very similar to those of Paulino’s in 2006-07, but never could earn a callup to the big leagues. Acquiring Paulino gives the Phillies four catchers worthy of some form of playing time. Carlos Ruiz had a poor year with the bat but proved to be effective in their playoff run, and is a very solid defensive catcher. Chris Coste isn’t as solid defensively, but has a much more potent bat. And Lou Marson is their top offensive prospect, a player the team is high on, and one that many feel will be the starter in 2010. Now add Paulino to the mix and, suffice it to say, someone isn’t making the big league club.

Perhaps Amaro felt that if someone got hurt, Paulino and his major league experience would be worth more than Jaramillo, especially given a 2006 season in which he was league average with the bat. With Marson waiting in the wings, Jaramillo realistically had little chance to earn significant playing time with the major league team. This trade isn’t going to make headlines, and many Phillies/Pirates fans reading this may have had no idea prior to venturing to this site, but it poses an interesting question for the Phillies: essentially, who stays and who goes? I would tend to think that Ruiz-Marson-Coste will start the season with the team, with Paulino a member of the AAA Iron Pigs affiliate.

Pirates fans, what say you about this under-the-radar and potentially meaningless move? What’s the scouting report on Paulino?

CC Sabathia‘s record-breaking contract is not the only news coming out of the Winter Meetings today. According to recent reports, there are some new details regarding Kerry Wood’s deal with the Indians, as well as the inking of Cesar Izturis to a 2-yr contract with the Orioles. Izturis spent the 2008 season with the Cardinals, posting a .292 wOBA. Suffice it to say, he is known much moreso for his glovework than his offense. Despite being -14 runs below average with the bat, UZR pegged him as being worth +10 runs on defense. Factor in his positional adjustment and value over replacement player and Izturis was roughly a +2 win player this past season, or slightly above average.

He will apparently receive $6 mil for his 2-yr deal with the Orioles. Marcel projects him to be worth -17 runs below average offensively. A modest UZR projection would see Cesar save +5 runs defensively. With the pro-rated adjustments and replacement levels thrown in, his true talent level for 2009 would be +0.8 wins. Multiply that by the supposed $5 mil going rate and the Orioles would be paying him $1 mil less than his fair market value. Dave’s earlier article suggests that $5 mil isn’t the going rate. If we adjust this year’s rate to $4.4 mil or so, then Izturis’ fair market value is $3.5 mil. All told, good deal for the Orioles. Little risk is involved and not much money is being committed.

My evaluation yesterday suggested Kerry Wood is a +1.4 win player for 2009, factoring in his run prevention skills as well as the leverage of the innings he will pitch in a new, and offensively superior, league. This would place his fair market value in the vicinity of $6-8 mil. A 2-yr deal in this regard should have been worth $14 mil. It is now being reported that his deal with the Indians is closer to 2-yr/$20 mil, meaning the Indians will be paying him over $7 mil/win relative to the average annual value. Wood will provide stability at the position given the revolving closers door for the Indians this past season, but he will have to vastly outdo his projection to merit being paid that much per win. Not even the overvalued K-Rod is receiving that much per win with his new deal.

Every year, a wide array of free agents hit the open market. Some are fantastic players entering their first eligible year. Others are role players primarily relied upon to round out a roster. So far this season, we have primarily seen deals involving the latter type of player. The cream of the crop—CC Sabathia, Mark Teixeira, Derek Lowe, and A.J. Burnett—are all yet to sign. Fully aware of their status in this year’s free agent class, these four seem to be perfectly content waiting for the absolute best deal as opposed to jumping at sweet initial offers.

Sabathia has been offered an extremely lucrative deal from the Yankees, and the Brewers appear to be working on inserting an opt-out clause after three years to sweeten their own proverbial pot. Teixeira is under 30 years old and a +5 WAR player even with the positional adjustment at first base. As Dave noted in his valuation, players like this don’t hit the market that often. Lowe is the elder statesman of this group, yet still appears to be very effective and heavily pursued. According to reports, it seems Lowe’s representatives have spoken to half of the league already. Burnett opted out of his own contract this season, and is standing pat on getting a five-year deal.

While Burnett is standing pat, the other three are somewhat interlocked. Sabathia has mentioned specifically that he is not waiting to see where Teixeira signs before making his decision. Despite this contention, one has to wonder if certain teams pursuing both players could commit an average annual value of $16-22 mil or so to both. Sabathia might not be waiting on Tex, but the decision of one definitely has the potential to affect where the other one signs.

On top of that, Lowe has made it clear that he will wait until CC signs before inking his own deal. Lowe isn’t going to cost as much as Sabathia, but once CC signs, will be the most attractive starting pitcher on the market. Signing now, prior to Sabathia, could actually cost him money; even though, no matter what, he is still rather likely to sign a deal with an AAV of close to $14 mil. And if Sabathia continues to make the Yankees and their $9 gazil offer wait, the stocks of both Burnett and Lowe will rise in their eyes.

Off-season signing triangles such as this have happened before, and will happen again, but it is still fascinating to cover the goings on every day. One player begins to look better because another player is being patient, and where another signs could adversely affect the plans of the other two. Today, things got a little clearer, as Sabathia reportedly signed with the Yankees. How will his $140 mil deal over six years affect the rest? The Phillies and Yankees were previously considered Lowe’s frontrunners, but will New York back off, or at least not pony up as much now? And if the Nationals give Teixeira an 8-yr, Helton-esque deal, could he turn it down despite their poor standing as a franchise?